IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eurphb/v87y2014i2p1-1110.1140-epjb-e2014-40699-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative comparison between crowd models for evacuation planning and evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Vaisagh Viswanathan
  • Chong Lee
  • Michael Lees
  • Siew Cheong
  • Peter Sloot

Abstract

Crowd simulation is rapidly becoming a standard tool for evacuation planning and evaluation. However, the many crowd models in the literature are structurally different, and few have been rigorously calibrated against real-world egress data, especially in emergency situations. In this paper we describe a procedure to quantitatively compare different crowd models or between models and real-world data. We simulated three models: (1) the lattice gas model, (2) the social force model, and (3) the RVO2 model, and obtained the distributions of six observables: (1) evacuation time, (2) zoned evacuation time, (3) passage density, (4) total distance traveled, (5) inconvenience, and (6) flow rate. We then used the DISTATIS procedure to compute the compromise matrix of statistical distances between the three models. Projecting the three models onto the first two principal components of the compromise matrix, we find the lattice gas and RVO2 models are similar in terms of the evacuation time, passage density, and flow rates, whereas the social force and RVO2 models are similar in terms of the total distance traveled. Most importantly, we find that the zoned evacuation times of the three models to be very different from each other. Thus we propose to use this variable, if it can be measured, as the key test between different models, and also between models and the real world. Finally, we compared the model flow rates against the flow rate of an emergency evacuation during the May 2008 Sichuan earthquake, and found the social force model agrees best with this real data. Copyright EDP Sciences, SIF, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Vaisagh Viswanathan & Chong Lee & Michael Lees & Siew Cheong & Peter Sloot, 2014. "Quantitative comparison between crowd models for evacuation planning and evaluation," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 87(2), pages 1-11, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eurphb:v:87:y:2014:i:2:p:1-11:10.1140/epjb/e2014-40699-x
    DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2014-40699-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1140/epjb/e2014-40699-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1140/epjb/e2014-40699-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Statistical and Nonlinear Physics;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eurphb:v:87:y:2014:i:2:p:1-11:10.1140/epjb/e2014-40699-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.